What's your position on abortion? And why?

[aelle]

Originally Posted by pinky3

Woman want rights... they have the right to choose whether or not to create a baby! That's a huge right. (If they do not have this right, and sex is not consensual, as others have pointed out, then it's a different story).

Could you expand on what you mean with this sentence? I'm almost certain I'm not reading it how you intended it. I expected it to end with "responsibility" rather than "right".
Having a child is a huge responsibility. I want to be a mother someday, and it only makes my stance stronger. I want to be a great mother. I want to be ready. I want to be prepared, to plan and desire my child and to choose motherhood with all my heart. I don't want to be like "birth control failure? Oh well, guess I'll have a kid now, eh?"
Women want rights, but they also want the ability to make the most responsible choices - for them, for their children, for their families. There's a reason the earliest pro choice association is called "planned parenthood".

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by aelle

Well yeah, an unwanted pregnancy sucks no matter what. But the options here are not a loved and desired child vs an unwanted child. It's.an unwanted pregnancy that you stop before much harm is done vs being stuck for 18 years with a kid you didn't want. You may think it's awful to think of a fetus as unwanted ; I feel it's a lot worse if the child lives to hear it and understand it.

I've often wondered if a child can just feel it, and know at a cellular level, regardless of whether they heard their mother say it, by virtue of the fact that they grew inside their mothers body, which holds the emotions of the woman, which they would have to absorb, being so closely attached to the woman during gestation?

[butterflyeffect]

I think that every woman deserves the rights to their own body and that includes whether or not to carry a child. I believe that all individuals deserve clear comprehsive sex education, access to contraception, and unconditional support. To me, individuals need to have access to all the cards and then be allowed to make their own decisions and bear the consequences of those without being subject to religious dogma or harsh judgement.

Yes, I'd rather never have an abortion. I would find it a heartbreaking position to be in. I do feel reassured though that at least I have access to a broad sex education, contraception, unbiased medical advice, people to turn too if I needed help. But even despite all of that I could still end up pregnant through any number of circumstances and I can't imagine how laying blame and judgement could do anything to help. So if someone from a privelidged background with access to all of the above can still get pregnant unintentionally then what about those without access to contraception, sex education, medical care or support networks? Why should they be denied a choice? I can't see how that would do anything but cause additional suffering and harm to all involved.

Whatever choice a person makes they will have to deal with the physical and emotional aftermath. I don't see any "Get out of jail free" cards in the equation and I think its important to acknowledge that all individuals are usually doing the best they can with the emotional resources they have.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by beast

Norway is my favorite country.

Live there? Been there? It's great except for not being very warm. ^^

Originally Posted by beast

Can you not avoid military service by getting a job, going to college, doing civil service, or claiming conscientious objector status?

Sure, or feign madness, or urinate the bed all the time ... ^^ Some are more succesful than others. Me, I didn't really try to avoid it. Like I said, it's not that I'm totally against it, because I can see the use of it.

Civil service is just another kind of bondage.

Originally Posted by beast

I do not support compulsory military service, but the fact that it exists in some parts of the world is not a good argument for why other constricting laws should exist in other parts of the world.

I don't know if you've got the point of why I brought it up. I brought it up because I didn't want people to say "well you're a man, so that's awfully easy for you to say", or:

Originally Posted by elucidate

Are you male by any chance?

so I had an example of something that I had to do, and something that I might even argue for being something that should exist... In short, to show that I might be willing to have some "restrictions" on my own self, not just put restrictions on others (pregnant women). I also said that the guy that impregnates the girl doesn't really have any rights, but also that it might be necessary for him to not have any rights, for the good of all involved. That example illustrates that same point just as well. In other words, sometimes the world just might have to be a little unfair if it is going to function well.

It had nothing to do with "well there are constricting laws some places, so I don't see why we can't make more of them".

[elucidate]

so I had an example of something that I had to do, and something that I might even argue for being something that should exist... In short, to show that I might be willing to have some "restrictions" on my own self, not just put restrictions on others (pregnant women). I also said that the guy that impregnates the girl doesn't really have any rights, but also that it might be necessary for him to not have any rights, for the good of all involved. That example illustrates that same point just as well. In other words, sometimes the world just might have to be a little unfair if it is going to function well.

It had nothing to do with "well there are constricting laws some places, so I don't see why we can't make more of them".

Uh, is this directed at me?

The quote you gave (that I posted) was directed at the poster before aelle with the letter t and some numbers, not you...Im a little confused here, it seems like you have taken it to mean it was directed at you, and have reacted to it as though it were?

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by aelle

I believe that as it is today, one of the activities that puts a fetus at highest risk of death is getting in a car - because that's when the woman has the highest risk of dying or getting severely injured herself. Should pregnant women be housebound for the sake of their unborn kids? Why not, does that look unreasonable\y restrictive? It may right now, but I can see the argument that would be put towards it: better safe than sorry, if you're not willing to alter your lifestyle you don't deserve a child, women who don't stay at home are selfish and irresponsible, it's not that bad because you can still walk places, oh well it's not like I loved driving in the first place...

Since people drive with kids all the time, I think that's highly unlikely. I don't know about the chances of getting permanent damage from having your mother drink while you're in the womb, but I would think that they are higher than getting in a car accident (if you do both... no not at the same time). If you drink too much, you will get drunk. If you drive a car, you miiiight get in an accident. The difference is that getting drunk is a sure thing if you want it, getting in a car accident is a game of probability. Society let's people do things that are potentially harmful all the time.

You can say that if one makes a law that prohibits one thing, then one might make a law that prohibits more things in the future. But how can that not be said about anything? The only difference I see is that this is just a potential (?) law, so we have the luxury of painting the potential future of it as bleak or merry as we want. This is a law that prohibits people from hurting others, just like there are laws that prohibit people from assaulting or murdering people. I can use the same logic with hurting other people. You start out with prohibiting people from hitting each other. When the law is enforced, the person that defended himself got a little "over-eager" and did more harm than necessary against the perp. This is not hypothetical. When I learned some self-defence, we were taught to do as little harm as possible, so that if we get attacked the law wouldn't backfire in our faces. I'm sure this vigilance has to be shown in many places (and it has its uses, but it's awfully unfortunate for someone who broke someones arm in self-defence or something minor like that, to be trialed for that... the perp brought it on himself). Maybe after some time, we can make it illegal to not only not do obvious harm like punching someone, but causing pain, so that people have to watch what they do all the time, lest someone with a grudge might make a complaint that they caused them pain even though there is no invisible marks. Then one can make it illegal to cause emotional harm, maybe first for people that do it over a long period of time, but then for someone who says mean things to someone. Do you still want there to be laws that protect people from not having others bash their skulls in, or perhaps you were against it to begin with? I don't know.

The *law* that I proposed would be more clear cut... it would be to outlaw pregnant women from doing obviously damaging, or very likely to damage, things like getting drunk. Let's just say that we outlaw getting drunk for them, and that's it. There isn't ambiguity in that it, it isn't "a pregnant woman may not participate in activities that might hurt their would-be child", that's a hell lot more ambigious. The only thing that can be said about that, I think, when it comes to slippery slope, is that "the law might get expanded to include more things later"... but how can that not be said about anything? At least a law that says "may not get drunk" is very hard to twist into not being allowed to eat fish liver or whatever.


Hey I live in a "nanny-nation"... ^^ The goverment outlawed those slot-machines, because people got addicted to playing them... gambling is outlawed, too. Do I agree with that? Hell no. I don't agree with outlawing things because it might cause self-destructive behaviour. But I agree with protecting people from each other.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by elucidate

Uh, is this directed at me?

The quote you gave (that I posted) was directed at the poster before aelle with the letter t and some numbers, not you...Im a little confused here, it seems like you have taken it to mean it was directed at you, and have reacted to it as though it were?

No, it was an example.

[James81]

Originally Posted by aelle

I feel it's a lot worse if the child lives to hear it and understand it.

No, because even if the child lives to hear it and understand it (assuming that happens anyway...there's a big difference between knowing you are about to have a baby and then staring down at that baby once it's born, btw), the child still has the power to choose how he/she feels about it and then has the power to overcome that and then h as the power to go on to live a rich and full life and have children of their own. There's a lot more to life than what your parents thought about you.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by James81

No, because even if the child lives to hear it and understand it (assuming that happens anyway...there's a big difference between knowing you are about to have a baby and then staring down at that baby once it's born, btw), the child still has the power to choose how he/she feels about it and then has the power to overcome that and then h as the power to go on to live a rich and full life and have children of their own. There's a lot more to life than what your parents thought about you.

Sure, they can choose to go and prove them wrong. That doesn't make the feeling of being unwanted go away though, does it...it's always there, I'd imagine?

[aelle]

Originally Posted by Elrond

If you drink too much, you will get drunk. If you drive a car, you miiiight get in an accident. The difference is that getting drunk is a sure thing if you want it, getting in a car accident is a game of probability. Society let's people do things that are potentially harmful all the time.

But the issue is not getting drunk - it's the damage on the fetus. Fetal alcohol syndrome can only occur during a fairly narrow time window of the pregnancy, and does not happen 100% of the time a woman gets hammered during this window. In other words, if you drink while pregnant you might harm your fetus, in the same way you might if you drive.

Stats on wikipedia say that FAS prevalence is 0.02 to 0.15% of births in the West, for 30% of women reporting having consumed alcohol during pregnancy. We're very far from "obviously damaging" or "very likely to damage" behavior, despite the societal hysteria about pregnancy and alcohol.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by Elrond

No, it was an example.

Ah, I see.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by James81

No, because

No? I assure you that I do feel that way

[James81]

Originally Posted by elucidate

Sure, they can choose to go and prove them wrong. That doesn't make the feeling of being unwanted go away though, does it...it's always there, I'd imagine?

I personally don't believe that. But that's because I had some realizations about my father a while back that completely changed the way I perceived him.

I think once you get a clear idea that your parents are giving you all that they have available to them to give (it may not be much at all, but it's all that they have available to give), and you realize that all they had available to give made you feel inadequate....it makes you feel a lot of compassion for them. I know it did for me, anyway. I felt "Wow, that was ALL my dad felt that he had to give? He must feel pretty bad about himself to feel that that is all he felt he had to give." And then I saw the ways in which he DID give, and saw that it was EVERYTHING (even if his "everything" might not be perceived as very much to me growing up), and realized that he didn't hold back on that everything.....it made me cry to think and realize that that he literally gave all he had to show his love.

I don't believe that being "unwanted" is the worst thing in the world for a child.

You may make the argument that that child might not ever see it in the same way that I saw my own father, sure. But as long as there is a breath in it's body, he/she has the free will to choose that for themselves.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by aelle

But the issue is not getting drunk - it's the damage on the fetus. Fetal alcohol syndrome can only occur during a fairly narrow time window of the pregnancy, and does not happen 100% of the time a woman gets hammered during this window. In other words, if you drink while pregnant you might harm your fetus, in the same way you might if you drive.

Stats on wikipedia say that FAS prevalence is 0.02 to 0.15% of births in the West, for 30% of women reporting having consumed alcohol during pregnancy. We're very far from "obviously damaging" or "very likely to damage" behavior, despite the societal hysteria about pregnancy and alcohol.

OK, like I said I didn't know about the risks. So I guess it isn't that bad an maybe not worth legislating against. I'm still against things if they are obviously harmful, but maybe there really are no such things. Oh well.

EDIT: I'll add though, that you say "having consumed alcohol" and my original suggestion was to prohibit "getting drunk" (if that leads to very likely harming the baby). I don't know the risks of getting drunk and harming the baby, as I've said, but the original proposition was a pregnant woman getting drunk (right?) and not merely consuming alcohol. I don't know what percentage of those people were getting drunk versus having a glass of red wine now and then. The possibility that small amounts of alcohol might not be bad for the baby has already been brought up some times, so I guess my stance hasn't changed much after all.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by James81

I personally don't believe that. But that's because I had some realizations about my father a while back that completely changed the way I perceived him.

I think once you get a clear idea that your parents are giving you all that they have available to them to give (it may not be much at all, but it's all that they have available to give), and you realize that all they had available to give made you feel inadequate....it makes you feel a lot of compassion for them. I know it did for me, anyway. I felt "Wow, that was ALL my dad felt that he had to give? He must feel pretty bad about himself to feel that that is all he felt he had to give." And then I saw the ways in which he DID give, and saw that it was EVERYTHING (even if his "everything" might not be perceived as very much to me growing up), and realized that he didn't hold back on that everything.....it made me cry to think and realize that that he literally gave all he had to show his love.

I don't believe that being "unwanted" is the worst thing in the world for a child.

You may make the argument that that child might not ever see it in the same way that I saw my own father, sure. But as long as there is a breath in it's body, he/she has the free will to choose that for themselves.

I'm not gonna make any argument about it. I've met people who knew they weren't wanted or loved, and it has seriously effected their self-esteem and sense of worth...which any sane person could imagine!

I can see what you are saying, and I've had those realizations myself. It doesn't make the hurt go away. I can't really know how it feels because I was wanted (even though technically I was the product of an 'accident')

How do you tell a woman who was raped every day by her father for years, that she should feel compassion for him and move past it? There is no forgiveness there.

[James81]

Originally Posted by elucidate

I'm not gonna make any argument about it. I've met people who knew they weren't wanted or loved, and it has seriously effected their self-esteem and sense of worth...which any sane person could imagine!

Of course it does. I'm not saying that it doesn't.

But they don't have to allow it to affect their self-esteem and sense of worth for the rest of their life.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by James81

Of course it does. I'm not saying that it doesn't.

But they don't have to allow it to affect their self-esteem and sense of worth for the rest of their life.

No they don't.

[James81]

Originally Posted by elucidate

How do you tell a woman who was raped every day by her father for years, that she should feel compassion for him and move past it? There is no forgiveness there.

There is, it's just really hard to imagine. And we don't want to imagine it. We don't want to imagine it because to imagine it would involve feeling some meausure of compassion for the rapist....and that is absolutely UNHEARD OF. And it's hard to convey something like that without making people go frog in a blender, so it's easier to just concede "Yes, you're right, there's not forgiveness there" than to deal with the tidal wave of emotion that comes from saying that forgiveness for the rapist will involve feeling compassion for him.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by James81

There is, it's just really hard to imagine. And we don't want to imagine it. We don't want to imagine it because to imagine it would involve feeling some meausure of compassion for the rapist....and that is absolutely UNHEARD OF. And it's hard to convey something like that without making people go frog in a blender, so it's easier to just concede "Yes, you're right, there's not forgiveness there" than to deal with the tidal wave of emotion that comes from saying that forgiveness for the rapist will involve feeling compassion for him.

Right! It's easier to just label them 'sick' because that makes us feel more comfortable about sharing the same oxygen and world as people who do these things to kids.

But you're right, it takes forgiveness to be able to move on, and that can only come with compassion. It's no easy feat though under those circumstances, and I'm always amazed when I hear people tell their story and feel at peace with it, and have actually forgiven the person.

I remember seeing a documentary about concentration camp survivors, and one woman had fully forgiven the people who took her family away from her and made her an orphan at 5 or something like that. It was amazing to watch.

[James81]

The last person who suggested such an idea, btw, got crucified.

[elucidate]

Originally Posted by James81

The last person who suggested such an idea, btw, got crucified.

Are you comparing yourself to the Big J, James?

[James81]

Haha, it's my cross to bear. A Messiah complex. Yes, my ego is eating itself.

[Mounds]

Originally Posted by James81

I don't believe that being "unwanted" is the worst thing in the world for a child.

You may make the argument that that child might not ever see it in the same way that I saw my own father, sure. But as long as there is a breath in it's body, he/she has the free will to choose that for themselves.

Not sure what this was in response to anymore, just wanted to put in my piece on it.
I've known a few people who grew up without a father and it affects all of them differently. I have an adult friend who I don't think is ever going to reach that point you describe. I've known him my whole life and it's always bothered him that everyone else had a dad and he didn't. What's worse is his dad lived in the same town as us (a town of 14,000) so it wasn't like he was too far away. He literally did not care. A couple of years ago, the man passed away. My friend had some serious emotional turmoil about whether or not to attend the funeral of the parent he never met. In the end, he didn't go.
Technically, he has the resources to do something about it. I don't think he realizes he has them though and if he does realize it, he doesn't know how to use them. Any suggestions on how to deal with that?

Also, about the FAS. Personally, I advocate no drinking while pregnant, even if the stats are low. I've assisted in a delivery once, where the mother was drunk during delivery. Sure enough, the baby had fetal alcohol syndrome. It was a pretty terrible thing and I'm not sure if the baby survived the night. I really don't think having a drink within those nine months is worth a lifetime of FAS (although I realize this case was pretty extreme).

-Tim

[James81]

Originally Posted by Mounds

Not sure what this was in response to anymore, just wanted to put in my piece on it.
I've known a few people who grew up without a father and it affects all of them differently. I have an adult friend who I don't think is ever going to reach that point you describe. I've known him my whole life and it's always bothered him that everyone else had a dad and he didn't. What's worse is his dad lived in the same town as us (a town of 14,000) so it wasn't like he was too far away. He literally did not care. A couple of years ago, the man passed away. My friend had some serious emotional turmoil about whether or not to attend the funeral of the parent he never met. In the end, he didn't go.
Technically, he has the resources to do something about it. I don't think he realizes he has them though and if he does realize it, he doesn't know how to use them. Any suggestions on how to deal with that?

In my case, all it took were some people who were willing to listen to me empathically. He probably has all these feelings inside that he hasn't been able to express. Heck, he may not even realize the extent of what he's feeling inside UNTIL he's expressed them. But it's probably hard for him to express them on his own.

My thoughts are that this would be a great opportunity for you to listen to him as a friend. You mentioned wanting to make deeper connections with people this year, and I think this might be a great opportunity for you to do that (assuming you are in a situation where you're able to do that).

[ssandra]

Originally Posted by t4488

I agree with your logic and I don't think abortion should be allowed in the case of rape. To me it would be the equivalent of giving Jaycee Dugard the right to kill her children tomorrow. This is really the first I have heard of the "punishment for sex" thing.

Originally Posted by pinky3

My opinion... woman should have rights, without a doubt. But rights come with responsibility. If you don't know that having sex can cause you to come pregnant, then sure you can have a abortion. I'm sure that's true for... well pretty much no one.

I asked a question of the anti-abortion people a few pages ago, which none have answered yet, so I'll ask you 2, if you don't mind answering...

You think that the rights of the unborn fetus are more important then the rights of the woman over her body right? therefor, the fetus living is more important then the woman not dying?

How do you feel about forced blood or bone marrow donation? Liver transplantation? Kidney transplantation?

And for example for innocent children, a 1 or 2 year old (they cannot be evil yet or have destroyed their own body with bad food or alcohol...)

Do you feel that is different from not being allowed to have an abortion? If so, why?

[butterflyeffect]

I so don't understand the anti avaliability of abortions debate. Just because you make them illegal doesn't mean that people will stop having them..!!!

If I was in a situation where I needed an abortion, I would either do it myself or go to a medical facility. Either way it would happen but at least in a proper facility my unborn baby isn't hurt as aposed to me doing the guess work with a coat hanger and no regulations.

[inri]

Originally Posted by t4488

Here is a hypothetical question. If you were trapped on a deserted island for 9 months with someone who was physically incapacitated and totally dependent on you, would you consider yourself to have the right to kill that person?

Only if he were growing inside of my body, only partially developed as a human being, completely dependent upon my physicality thus affecting my entire being (both physically and mentally) in a myriad of unpleasant and even life threatening ways.

Your analogy or comparison simply doesn't work for several reasons....the main one being:

The key to the whole pro-choice stance is that the fetus (a living thing on it's way to 'becoming' a fully developed human being) lives INSIDE and OFF OF the body of a legitimate, fully developed human being.

BTW...I'd love to hear your response to Ssandra's questions!..please DO answer.

[James81]

Originally Posted by inri

The key to the whole pro-choice stance is that the fetus (a living thing on it's way to 'becoming' a fully developed human being) lives INSIDE and OFF OF the body of a legitimate, fully developed human being.

Of course. And trust me, if someone came along and injected it into your uterus with a turkey baster, I could see your point.

[sorter]

Originally Posted by inri

Your analogy or comparison simply doesn't work for several reasons....the main one being:

The key to the whole pro-choice stance is that the fetus (a living thing on it's way to 'becoming' a fully developed human being) lives INSIDE and OFF OF the body of a legitimate, fully developed human being.

I don't see how t4488's hypothetical doesn't work.
Why does inside or outside make a difference? Both have the potential for further life, depending on you're decision.
Both can be a threat to the, uh, giver of life.
The hypothetical doesn't say but let's assume the risk or burden of maintaining either life is equal.

The only difference I can see is the innocence of the fetus. (see #175)

Originally Posted by inri

BTW...I'd love to hear your response to Ssandra's questions!..please DO answer.

Me too. It's a tough and great question.
.

[inri]

Originally Posted by pinky3

If you see a scan of a baby, they are a precious being.

I saw a scan of my daughter at the 7 week mark... 'I' certainly thought the little blob I saw there was 'precious,' as I was thrilled to be pregnant, however, I kind of doubt if the visual would have evoked gasps of 'oh how precious' from anyone who wasn't emotionally invested in the pregnancy.

Woman want rights... they have the right to choose whether or not to create a baby! That's a huge right. (If they do not have this right, and sex is not consensual, as others have pointed out, then it's a different story).

This is precisely the 'punishment for having sex' bit that we were discussing earlier. The 'ol "You have sex - pay the piper" mentality. Indeed, in a perfect world all sexual encounters would be well thought out and planned and therefore no unwanted pregnancies would occur...the reality of the situation is that the sexual encounter, by it's very nature, is not always entered into with a calculated, precise, methodical plan that would ensure safety from pregnancy.

There's nothing quite like our sexual urges in terms of causing us to throw caution to wind and take a risk....it would seem it's part of our intrinsic nature to pursue ecstasy through our physical desires...just because we all know that sex 'can' result in a pregnancy does not mean that this is at the forefront of our mind when we engage in sex...Like it or not, the fact is that Sex is one of those things that can cause most of us to temporarily abandon our logic....perhaps that's why we find it so much fun!

I would be interested actually to know the percentage of times couples engage in sex to actually create a life vs. the times they hook up for the pure pleasure of it....I'm thinking the numbers are not even close.

What I always think is: Ask the fetus for his/her opinion (they wouldn't be like, thanks for aborting me??).

Yeah...this is just the thing though....A fetus does not, CANNOT have an opinion. I suppose you could ask a fetus anything you chose, but it will nver answer.... .....it is not yet a fully developed, conscious human being capable of processing information or feelings whether emotional of physical. AT the gestational stage where most abortions are performed, the fetus does not yet have the brain development or nervous system to process any such information. It can respond reflexively to stimuli but that's about it.

While this may not mean alot to you as you are more intently focused upon the 'potential' human being that the fetus will 'probably' grow into if left alone (It's actually believed that up to 1/3 of pregnancies end in miscarriage during the first trimester) it is an important factor in the decision making process of many women encountering an unwanted pregnancy.